Search

Objective: Mitigating algorithmic disparities is a critical challenge in healthcare research, where ensuring equity and fairness is paramount. While large-scale healthcare data exist across multiple institutions, cross-institutional collaborations often face privacy constraints, highlighting the need for privacy-preserving solutions that also promote fairness. Materials and Methods: In this study, we present Fair Federated Machine Learning (FairFML), a model-agnostic solution designed to reduce algorithmic bias in cross-institutional healthcare collaborations while preserving patient privacy. As a proof of concept, we validated FairFML using a real-world clinical case study focused on reducing gender disparities in cardiac arrest outcome prediction. Results: We demonstrate that the proposed FairFML framework enhances fairness in federated learning (FL) models without compromising predictive performance. Our findings show that FairFML improves model fairness by up to 65% compared to the centralized model, while maintaining performance comparable to both local and centralized models, as measured by receiver operating characteristic analysis. Discussion and Conclusion: FairFML offers a promising and flexible solution for FL collaborations, with its adaptability allowing seamless integration with various FL frameworks and models, from traditional statistical methods to deep learning techniques. This makes FairFML a robust approach for developing fairer FL models across diverse clinical and biomedical applications.

Clinical and biomedical research in low-resource settings often faces significant challenges due to the need for high-quality data with sufficient sample sizes to construct effective models. These constraints hinder robust model training and prompt researchers to seek methods for leveraging existing knowledge from related studies to support new research efforts. Transfer learning (TL), a machine learning technique, emerges as a powerful solution by utilizing knowledge from pre-trained models to enhance the performance of new models, offering promise across various healthcare domains. Despite its conceptual origins in the 1990s, the application of TL in medical research has remained limited, especially beyond image analysis. In our review of TL applications in structured clinical and biomedical data, we screened 3,515 papers, with 55 meeting the inclusion criteria. Among these, only 2% (one out of 55) utilized external studies, and 7% (four out of 55) addressed scenarios involving multi-site collaborations with privacy constraints. To achieve actionable TL with structured medical data while addressing regional disparities, inequality, and privacy constraints in healthcare research, we advocate for the careful identification of appropriate source data and models, the selection of suitable TL frameworks, and the validation of TL models with proper baselines.

Generative artificial intelligence (AI) has brought revolutionary innovations in various fields, including medicine. However, it also exhibits limitations. In response, retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) provides a potential solution, enabling models to generate more accurate contents by leveraging the retrieval of external knowledge. With the rapid advancement of generative AI, RAG can pave the way for connecting this transformative technology with medical applications and is expected to bring innovations in equity, reliability, and personalization to health care.

The ethical integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in healthcare necessitates addressing fairness-a concept that is highly context-specific across medical fields. Extensive studies have been conducted to expand the technical components of AI fairness, while tremendous calls for AI fairness have been raised from healthcare. Despite this, a significant disconnect persists between technical advancements and their practical clinical applications, resulting in a lack of contextualized discussion of AI fairness in clinical settings. Through a detailed evidence gap analysis, our review systematically pinpoints several deficiencies concerning both healthcare data and the provided AI fairness solutions. We highlight the scarcity of research on AI fairness in many medical domains where AI technology is increasingly utilized. Additionally, our analysis highlights a substantial reliance on group fairness, aiming to ensure equality among demographic groups from a macro healthcare system perspective; in contrast, individual fairness, focusing on equity at a more granular level, is frequently overlooked. To bridge these gaps, our review advances actionable strategies for both the healthcare and AI research communities. Beyond applying existing AI fairness methods in healthcare, we further emphasize the importance of involving healthcare professionals to refine AI fairness concepts and methods to ensure contextually relevant and ethically sound AI applications in healthcare.

The escalating integration of machine learning in high-stakes fields such as healthcare raises substantial concerns about model fairness. We propose an interpretable framework - Fairness-Aware Interpretable Modeling (FAIM), to improve model fairness without compromising performance, featuring an interactive interface to identify a "fairer" model from a set of high-performing models and promoting the integration of data-driven evidence and clinical expertise to enhance contextualized fairness. We demonstrated FAIM's value in reducing sex and race biases by predicting hospital admission with two real-world databases, MIMIC-IV-ED and SGH-ED. We show that for both datasets, FAIM models not only exhibited satisfactory discriminatory performance but also significantly mitigated biases as measured by well-established fairness metrics, outperforming commonly used bias-mitigation methods. Our approach demonstrates the feasibility of improving fairness without sacrificing performance and provides an a modeling mode that invites domain experts to engage, fostering a multidisciplinary effort toward tailored AI fairness.

Survival analysis serves as a fundamental component in numerous healthcare applications, where the determination of the time to specific events (such as the onset of a certain disease or death) for patients is crucial for clinical decision-making. Scoring systems are widely used for swift and efficient risk prediction. However, existing methods for constructing survival scores presume that data originates from a single source, posing privacy challenges in collaborations with multiple data owners. We propose a novel framework for building federated scoring systems for multi-site survival outcomes, ensuring both privacy and communication efficiency. We applied our approach to sites with heterogeneous survival data originating from emergency departments in Singapore and the United States. Additionally, we independently developed local scores at each site. In testing datasets from each participant site, our proposed federated scoring system consistently outperformed all local models, evidenced by higher integrated area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (iAUC) values, with a maximum improvement of 11.6%. Additionally, the federated score's time-dependent AUC(t) values showed advantages over local scores, exhibiting narrower confidence intervals (CIs) across most time points. The model developed through our proposed method exhibits effective performance on each local site, signifying noteworthy implications for healthcare research. Sites participating in our proposed federated scoring model training gained benefits by acquiring survival models with enhanced prediction accuracy and efficiency. This study demonstrates the effectiveness of our privacy-preserving federated survival score generation framework and its applicability to real-world heterogeneous survival data.

Survival analysis is essential for studying time-to-event outcomes and providing a dynamic understanding of the probability of an event occurring over time. Various survival analysis techniques, from traditional statistical models to state-of-the-art machine learning algorithms, support healthcare intervention and policy decisions. However, there remains ongoing discussion about their comparative performance. We conducted a comparative study of several survival analysis methods, including Cox proportional hazards (CoxPH), stepwise CoxPH, elastic net penalized Cox model, Random Survival Forests (RSF), Gradient Boosting machine (GBM) learning, AutoScore-Survival, DeepSurv, time-dependent Cox model based on neural network (CoxTime), and DeepHit survival neural network. We applied the concordance index (C-index) for model goodness-of-fit, and integral Brier scores (IBS) for calibration, and considered the model interpretability. As a case study, we performed a retrospective analysis of patients admitted through the emergency department of a tertiary hospital from 2017 to 2019, predicting 90-day all-cause mortality based on patient demographics, clinicopathological features, and historical data. The results of the C-index indicate that deep learning achieved comparable performance, with DeepSurv producing the best discrimination (DeepSurv: 0.893; CoxTime: 0.892; DeepHit: 0.891). The calibration of DeepSurv (IBS: 0.041) performed the best, followed by RSF (IBS: 0.042) and GBM (IBS: 0.0421), all using the full variables. Moreover, AutoScore-Survival, using a minimal variable subset, is easy to interpret, and can achieve good discrimination and calibration (C-index: 0.867; IBS: 0.044). While all models were satisfactory, DeepSurv exhibited the best discrimination and calibration. In addition, AutoScore-Survival offers a more parsimonious model and excellent interpretability.

Federated learning (FL) has shown promising potential in safeguarding data privacy in healthcare collaborations. While the term "FL" was originally coined by the engineering community, the statistical field has also explored similar privacy-preserving algorithms. Statistical FL algorithms, however, remain considerably less recognized than their engineering counterparts. Our goal was to bridge the gap by presenting the first comprehensive comparison of FL frameworks from both engineering and statistical domains. We evaluated five FL frameworks using both simulated and real-world data. The results indicate that statistical FL algorithms yield less biased point estimates for model coefficients and offer convenient confidence interval estimations. In contrast, engineering-based methods tend to generate more accurate predictions, sometimes surpassing central pooled and statistical FL models. This study underscores the relative strengths and weaknesses of both types of methods, emphasizing the need for increased awareness and their integration in future FL applications.

The widespread use of ChatGPT and other emerging technology powered by generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) has drawn much attention to potential ethical issues, especially in high-stakes applications such as healthcare, but ethical discussions are yet to translate into operationalisable solutions. Furthermore, ongoing ethical discussions often neglect other types of GenAI that have been used to synthesise data (e.g., images) for research and practical purposes, which resolved some ethical issues and exposed others. We conduct a scoping review of ethical discussions on GenAI in healthcare to comprehensively analyse gaps in the current research, and further propose to reduce the gaps by developing a checklist for comprehensive assessment and transparent documentation of ethical discussions in GenAI research. The checklist can be readily integrated into the current peer review and publication system to enhance GenAI research, and may be used for ethics-related disclosures for GenAI-powered products, healthcare applications of such products and beyond.

Artificial intelligence (AI) has demonstrated the ability to extract insights from data, but the issue of fairness remains a concern in high-stakes fields such as healthcare. Despite extensive discussion and efforts in algorithm development, AI fairness and clinical concerns have not been adequately addressed. In this paper, we discuss the misalignment between technical and clinical perspectives of AI fairness, highlight the barriers to AI fairness' translation to healthcare, advocate multidisciplinary collaboration to bridge the knowledge gap, and provide possible solutions to address the clinical concerns pertaining to AI fairness.

Federated learning (FL) has gained popularity in clinical research in recent years to facilitate privacy-preserving collaboration. Structured data, one of the most prevalent forms of clinical data, has experienced significant growth in volume concurrently, notably with the widespread adoption of electronic health records in clinical practice. This review examines FL applications on structured medical data, identifies contemporary limitations and discusses potential innovations. We searched five databases, SCOPUS, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Embase, and CINAHL, to identify articles that applied FL to structured medical data and reported results following the PRISMA guidelines. Each selected publication was evaluated from three primary perspectives, including data quality, modeling strategies, and FL frameworks. Out of the 1160 papers screened, 34 met the inclusion criteria, with each article consisting of one or more studies that used FL to handle structured clinical/medical data. Of these, 24 utilized data acquired from electronic health records, with clinical predictions and association studies being the most common clinical research tasks that FL was applied to. Only one article exclusively explored the vertical FL setting, while the remaining 33 explored the horizontal FL setting, with only 14 discussing comparisons between single-site (local) and FL (global) analysis. The existing FL applications on structured medical data lack sufficient evaluations of clinically meaningful benefits, particularly when compared to single-site analyses. Therefore, it is crucial for future FL applications to prioritize clinical motivations and develop designs and methodologies that can effectively support and aid clinical practice and research.

A prediction model is most useful if it generalizes beyond the development data with external validations, but to what extent should it generalize remains unclear. In practice, prediction models are externally validated using data from very different settings, including populations from other health systems or countries, with predictably poor results. This may not be a fair reflection of the performance of the model which was designed for a specific target population or setting, and may be stretching the expected model generalizability. To address this, we suggest to externally validate a model using new data from the target population to ensure clear implications of validation performance on model reliability, whereas model generalizability to broader settings should be carefully investigated during model development instead of explored post-hoc. Based on this perspective, we propose a roadmap that facilitates the development and application of reliable, fair, and trustworthy artificial intelligence prediction models., Comment: 12 pages, 2 figures

We propose FedScore, a privacy-preserving federated learning framework for scoring system generation across multiple sites to facilitate cross-institutional collaborations. The FedScore framework includes five modules: federated variable ranking, federated variable transformation, federated score derivation, federated model selection and federated model evaluation. To illustrate usage and assess FedScore's performance, we built a hypothetical global scoring system for mortality prediction within 30 days after a visit to an emergency department using 10 simulated sites divided from a tertiary hospital in Singapore. We employed a pre-existing score generator to construct 10 local scoring systems independently at each site and we also developed a scoring system using centralized data for comparison. We compared the acquired FedScore model's performance with that of other scoring models using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. The FedScore model achieved an average area under the curve (AUC) value of 0.763 across all sites, with a standard deviation (SD) of 0.020. We also calculated the average AUC values and SDs for each local model, and the FedScore model showed promising accuracy and stability with a high average AUC value which was closest to the one of the pooled model and SD which was lower than that of most local models. This study demonstrates that FedScore is a privacy-preserving scoring system generator with potentially good generalizability.

Current practice in interpretable machine learning often focuses on explaining the final model trained from data, e.g., by using the Shapley additive explanations (SHAP) method. The recently developed Shapley variable importance cloud (ShapleyVIC) extends the current practice to a group of "nearly optimal models" to provide comprehensive and robust variable importance assessments, with estimated uncertainty intervals for a more complete understanding of variable contributions to predictions. ShapleyVIC was initially developed for applications with traditional regression models, and the benefits of ShapleyVIC inference have been demonstrated in real-life prediction tasks using the logistic regression model. However, as a model-agnostic approach, ShapleyVIC application is not limited to such scenarios. In this work, we extend ShapleyVIC implementation for machine learning models to enable wider applications, and propose it as a useful complement to the current SHAP analysis to enable more trustworthy applications of these black-box models.

Objective: The proper handling of missing values is critical to delivering reliable estimates and decisions, especially in high-stakes fields such as clinical research. The increasing diversity and complexity of data have led many researchers to develop deep learning (DL)-based imputation techniques. We conducted a systematic review to evaluate the use of these techniques, with a particular focus on data types, aiming to assist healthcare researchers from various disciplines in dealing with missing values. Methods: We searched five databases (MEDLINE, Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL, and Scopus) for articles published prior to August 2021 that applied DL-based models to imputation. We assessed selected publications from four perspectives: health data types, model backbone (i.e., main architecture), imputation strategies, and comparison with non-DL-based methods. Based on data types, we created an evidence map to illustrate the adoption of DL models. Results: We included 64 articles, of which tabular static (26.6%, 17/64) and temporal data (37.5%, 24/64) were the most frequently investigated. We found that model backbone(s) differed among data types as well as the imputation strategy. The "integrated" strategy, that is, the imputation task being solved concurrently with downstream tasks, was popular for tabular temporal (50%, 12/24) and multi-modal data (71.4%, 5/7), but limited for other data types. Moreover, DL-based imputation methods yielded better imputation accuracy in most studies, compared with non-DL-based methods. Conclusion: DL-based imputation models can be customized based on data type, addressing the corresponding missing patterns, and its associated "integrated" strategy can enhance the efficacy of imputation, especially in scenarios where data is complex. Future research may focus on the portability and fairness of DL-based models for healthcare data imputation.

Objective: Shapley additive explanations (SHAP) is a popular post-hoc technique for explaining black box models. While the impact of data imbalance on predictive models has been extensively studied, it remains largely unknown with respect to SHAP-based model explanations. This study sought to investigate the effects of data imbalance on SHAP explanations for deep learning models, and to propose a strategy to mitigate these effects. Materials and Methods: We propose to adjust class distributions in the background and explanation data in SHAP when explaining black box models. Our data balancing strategy is to compose background data and explanation data with an equal distribution of classes. To evaluate the effects of data adjustment on model explanation, we propose to use the beeswarm plot as a qualitative tool to identify "abnormal" explanation artifacts, and quantitatively test the consistency between variable importance and prediction power. We demonstrated our proposed approach in an empirical study that predicted inpatient mortality using the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC-III) data and a multilayer perceptron. Results: Using the data balancing strategy would allow us to reduce the number of the artifacts in the beeswarm plot, thus mitigating the negative effects of data imbalance. Additionally, with the balancing strategy, the top-ranked variables from the corresponding importance ranking demonstrated improved discrimination power. Discussion and Conclusion: Our findings suggest that balanced background and explanation data could help reduce the noise in explanation results induced by skewed data distribution and improve the reliability of variable importance ranking. Furthermore, these balancing procedures improve the potential of SHAP in identifying patients with abnormal characteristics in clinical applications.

Background: Risk prediction models are useful tools in clinical decision-making which help with risk stratification and resource allocations and may lead to a better health care for patients. AutoScore is a machine learning-based automatic clinical score generator for binary outcomes. This study aims to expand the AutoScore framework to provide a tool for interpretable risk prediction for ordinal outcomes. Methods: The AutoScore-Ordinal framework is generated using the same 6 modules of the original AutoScore algorithm including variable ranking, variable transformation, score derivation (from proportional odds models), model selection, score fine-tuning, and model evaluation. To illustrate the AutoScore-Ordinal performance, the method was conducted on electronic health records data from the emergency department at Singapore General Hospital over 2008 to 2017. The model was trained on 70% of the data, validated on 10% and tested on the remaining 20%. Results: This study included 445,989 inpatient cases, where the distribution of the ordinal outcome was 80.7% alive without 30-day readmission, 12.5% alive with 30-day readmission, and 6.8% died inpatient or by day 30 post discharge. Two point-based risk prediction models were developed using two sets of 8 predictor variables identified by the flexible variable selection procedure. The two models indicated reasonably good performance measured by mean area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (0.785 and 0.793) and generalized c-index (0.737 and 0.760), which were comparable to alternative models. Conclusion: AutoScore-Ordinal provides an automated and easy-to-use framework for development and validation of risk prediction models for ordinal outcomes, which can systematically identify potential predictors from high-dimensional data.

Risk scores are widely used for clinical decision making and commonly generated from logistic regression models. Machine-learning-based methods may work well for identifying important predictors, but such 'black box' variable selection limits interpretability, and variable importance evaluated from a single model can be biased. We propose a robust and interpretable variable selection approach using the recently developed Shapley variable importance cloud (ShapleyVIC) that accounts for variability across models. Our approach evaluates and visualizes overall variable contributions for in-depth inference and transparent variable selection, and filters out non-significant contributors to simplify model building steps. We derive an ensemble variable ranking from variable contributions, which is easily integrated with an automated and modularized risk score generator, AutoScore, for convenient implementation. In a study of early death or unplanned readmission, ShapleyVIC selected 6 of 41 candidate variables to create a well-performing model, which had similar performance to a 16-variable model from machine-learning-based ranking.

Interpretable machine learning has been focusing on explaining final models that optimize performance. The current state-of-the-art is the Shapley additive explanations (SHAP) that locally explains variable impact on individual predictions, and it is recently extended for a global assessment across the dataset. Recently, Dong and Rudin proposed to extend the investigation to models from the same class as the final model that are "good enough", and identified a previous overclaim of variable importance based on a single model. However, this method does not directly integrate with existing Shapley-based interpretations. We close this gap by proposing a Shapley variable importance cloud that pools information across good models to avoid biased assessments in SHAP analyses of final models, and communicate the findings via novel visualizations. We demonstrate the additional insights gain compared to conventional explanations and Dong and Rudin's method using criminal justice and electronic medical records data.

Objective: Temporal electronic health records (EHRs) can be a wealth of information for secondary uses, such as clinical events prediction or chronic disease management. However, challenges exist for temporal data representation. We therefore sought to identify these challenges and evaluate novel methodologies for addressing them through a systematic examination of deep learning solutions. Methods: We searched five databases (PubMed, EMBASE, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers [IEEE] Xplore Digital Library, the Association for Computing Machinery [ACM] digital library, and Web of Science) complemented with hand-searching in several prestigious computer science conference proceedings. We sought articles that reported deep learning methodologies on temporal data representation in structured EHR data from January 1, 2010, to August 30, 2020. We summarized and analyzed the selected articles from three perspectives: nature of time series, methodology, and model implementation. Results: We included 98 articles related to temporal data representation using deep learning. Four major challenges were identified, including data irregularity, data heterogeneity, data sparsity, and model opacity. We then studied how deep learning techniques were applied to address these challenges. Finally, we discuss some open challenges arising from deep learning. Conclusion: Temporal EHR data present several major challenges for clinical prediction modeling and data utilization. To some extent, current deep learning solutions can address these challenges. Future studies can consider designing comprehensive and integrated solutions. Moreover, researchers should incorporate additional clinical domain knowledge into study designs and enhance the interpretability of the model to facilitate its implementation in clinical practice.

Background: Medical decision-making impacts both individual and public health. Clinical scores are commonly used among a wide variety of decision-making models for determining the degree of disease deterioration at the bedside. AutoScore was proposed as a useful clinical score generator based on machine learning and a generalized linear model. Its current framework, however, still leaves room for improvement when addressing unbalanced data of rare events. Methods: Using machine intelligence approaches, we developed AutoScore-Imbalance, which comprises three components: training dataset optimization, sample weight optimization, and adjusted AutoScore. All scoring models were evaluated on the basis of their area under the curve (AUC) in the receiver operating characteristic analysis and balanced accuracy (i.e., mean value of sensitivity and specificity). By utilizing a publicly accessible dataset from Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, we assessed the proposed model and baseline approaches in the prediction of inpatient mortality. Results: AutoScore-Imbalance outperformed baselines in terms of AUC and balanced accuracy. The nine-variable AutoScore-Imbalance sub-model achieved the highest AUC of 0.786 (0.732-0.839) while the eleven-variable original AutoScore obtained an AUC of 0.723 (0.663-0.783), and the logistic regression with 21 variables obtained an AUC of 0.743 (0.685-0.800). The AutoScore-Imbalance sub-model (using down-sampling algorithm) yielded an AUC of 0. 0.771 (0.718-0.823) with only five variables, demonstrating a good balance between performance and variable sparsity. Conclusions: The AutoScore-Imbalance tool has the potential to be applied to highly unbalanced datasets to gain further insight into rare medical events and to facilitate real-world clinical decision-making.

Scoring systems are highly interpretable and widely used to evaluate time-to-event outcomes in healthcare research. However, existing time-to-event scores are predominantly created ad-hoc using a few manually selected variables based on clinician's knowledge, suggesting an unmet need for a robust and efficient generic score-generating method. AutoScore was previously developed as an interpretable machine learning score generator, integrated both machine learning and point-based scores in the strong discriminability and accessibility. We have further extended it to time-to-event data and developed AutoScore-Survival, for automatically generating time-to-event scores with right-censored survival data. Random survival forest provides an efficient solution for selecting variables, and Cox regression was used for score weighting. We illustrated our method in a real-life study of 90-day mortality of patients in intensive care units and compared its performance with survival models (i.e., Cox) and the random survival forest. The AutoScore-Survival-derived scoring model was more parsimonious than survival models built using traditional variable selection methods (e.g., penalized likelihood approach and stepwise variable selection), and its performance was comparable to survival models using the same set of variables. Although AutoScore-Survival achieved a comparable integrated area under the curve of 0.782 (95% CI: 0.767-0.794), the integer-valued time-to-event scores generated are favorable in clinical applications because they are easier to compute and interpret. Our proposed AutoScore-Survival provides an automated, robust and easy-to-use machine learning-based clinical score generator to studies of time-to-event outcomes. It provides a systematic guideline to facilitate the future development of time-to-event scores for clinical applications.